2006 Sonata oil filter

In earlier posts, people were asking where to get oil filters for their
Sonatas to avoid the high prices at the dealer. I yahooed and found several
places that list multiple filters. For instance,
http://replacement.autopartswarehou...CYL-006&category=All&part=Oil Filter&dp=false
lists three different ones. One of them is a Bosch, which is listed as OEM.
The other two are listed as Hyundai specific. The Bosch one is $5.17.
Shipping for three of them is only about $5.25. These should meet the
requirements, shouldn't they?

Tom

 

Thanks but these are for the 4 cyl. Sonata. That is a common filter.The oil
filter we all need is for the 6 cyl. it takes a cartridge filter that I can
only find at a dealer.
Rob

 

Same thing here. I googled and the only source I could find was the
dealer. I paid about $10.50 for the filter, O rings and drain plug
gasket including tax.

 

I paid almost $20 for the same thing.

 

I went to a local oil change facility which charged an extra $10
because this was a cartridge filter. They used a real Hyundai filter
by the way.

 

I went to a local oil change facility which charged an extra $10
because this was a cartridge filter. They used a real Hyundai filter
by the way.

 

My inner redneck says we need a remote oil filter assembly for these
cars pronto, or an adapter... Can't beat a good ol' $2.50 Motorcraft
FL1A. I'll mention this to my friend, he specializes in these sorts of
things... (aluminum/brass/copper/etc casting/finishing)

Plus, who wants to get their fingers all dirty, or have *that much*
opportunity to introduce something abrasive to the 'clean' side of the
oil filter housing? The world abandoned cartridge style filters for a
reason...

Oh well, I'm sure its some environmental boob that came up with this.
If you *really* want to deal with the problem figure out a profitable
way to recycle cartridge filters - this would fix the problem with new
and old cars alike.

Then again, theres a reason why anybody can buy R134A and its a serious
pain in the arse (or a vacation to Mexico, which leads to the arse-pain)
to get R12 - and it has very little to do with the ozone layer... :|

JS

 

Yea, you all are correct. I was talking about the 4 cylinder. When the
dealer showed me the cartridge for the 6 cylinder, all I could think of was
my 1954 Chevy that had a cartridge filter!!!!! Talk about a step backwards.
Those were a pain in the arse, for sure. First thing you need is a cooking
baster to get the oil out of the housing, I guess. What a messy job! Now
I'm glad I have a 4 cylinder. You may beat me off the line (like I care),
but I'll beat you out of the Oil Change Lane. )

Take care,

Tom

 

Actually, it all drains down as soon as you open the lid. No mess at all!

Now, as soon as Advance Auto gets their act together and starts selling the
Purolator L35610, we'll start paying $4.00 a filter. You can get them to
order it, but there's a $10.00 per filter shipping charge.

 

Tom, you couldn't be more wrong!! It is much easier, and faster, than
crawling under the car, perhaps needing to squeeze in a filter wrench,
having a mess of oil drip down on you, then getting the new filter,
squeezing a bead of oil on the gasket, crawling back under and putting the
filter on.

I bet it takes me half the time, with less than half of the muscle work.

And the canister completely drains when you pull the oil drain plug. Just
remove the cartridge, put in a new one with two new O-rings, and screw on
the cover. Done.

Eric

 

I'm with you, Tom. I'm very happy with the four-cylinder. We'll also
save on spark plugs, plug wires, coils, etc. And I don't think the V-6
will beat me off the line. It might beat me after 30 MPH, but the 4
pulls pretty good off the line if I rev it enough! If you compare the
performance numbers (I posted a link to them some time ago), the V-6 has
a very minor performance advantage over the four. I'm guessing the
extra weight it carries and different gearing probably account for most
of it.


Matt

 

Wow, that sounds great. Now I wish I had that setup!!! Maybe we did make
some progress in the last 50 years! Unfortunately, my 54 Chevy got 20 miles
per gallon and look how far we progressed in the area. ( That old car
weighed 3250 pounds, too. Sad Sad Sad.

Tom

 

Yea, Matt, I'm happy with the performance side of my 4 banger. Actually,
162 horses out of a 4 is pretty darn good. No complaints so far except a
sticking drivers side outside door handle that doesn't close all the way.
They'll replace it at the next visit.

Tom

 

Bear in mind that those numbers were for the LX model as I recall. The GLS
V6 is significantly lighter than the LX, but a bit heavier than the GL-4.
With my traction control off, I have done a few 6.5 sec. 0-60 unofficial
runs. While I agree that it would be close to 30 MPH, I would be ahead and
pulling away. With that said, the 4 has my respect compared to other 4's
of the same class.

Eric

 

I have the same problem with my door handle. Guess I'll mention it on my
next visit to the dealer. It didn't annoy me enough so far to think of it
when I was there. But it does seem to be happening more often.

Eric

 

I dunno... Can you have 3 cylinders shut down and it keep running?

On the 2.7 you can

Of course that only happens on the occasion a cam jumps time (ouch), or
somebody forgets to plug the 'rear bank' of fuel injectors back in

JS

 

I dunno, my 2.7 has
http://www.wixfilters.com/filterlookup/PartDetail.asp?Part=51324
screwed to it right now.

Damned nice filter. I think you could smack it with a roofing hammer
and not dent it.

JS

 

If new cars were allowed to pollute like your 54 Chevy and had its same
performance, then they'd get way more than 20 MPG for the same weight car.

We've progressed a long way in the last 50 years. My 4 cylinder Sonata
outperforms most of the cars made in the 50s regardless of engine size
and gets 31 MPG.


Matt

 

I just got back from my first trip of any length with my Sonata and was
disappointed in the mileage. I got 30.8 on the outbound leg (200 miles)
which is basically what I've been getting commuting to work. This was
on good two-lane roads (routes 6 and 66 in Western PA), however, we did
get caught in a couple of construction zones and spent a fair number of
miles driving around Grove City so that may have offset the highway
mileage. The car seemed to do real well on the way back, but I haven't
filled it up to check yet. I made the trip back (190 miles) and the
gauge was right on the 3/4 tank mark. I typically get 140-150 before it
hits this point so I think the mileage on the highway was pretty good.
However, I'll drive it to work this week before filling it again so that
will bring the average down a little. Still need a good long highway
trip to get a good test.


Matt

 

That wasn't my recollection, but unfortunately the web site now has the
07 models. The big difference was the V-6 vs. the 4, not the trip
levels. Even the automatic trans doesn't add that much weight, it was
the engine and the heavier suspension required to support it that
appears to be the big difference. Even for the 07 models the Limited
(which appears to be the successor to the LX) and the SE (appears to be
similar to the former GXL-V6) have identical weights. The GLS
(successor to the GL) weighs more than 200 lbs less than the SE and
Limited with the standard transmission and just under 200 lbs less with
the automatic. 200 lbs makes a difference on a car that weighs less
than 3500 lbs.

The standard shift tranny also has a slightly lower final drive ratio
than the 5 speed automatic (althought it is higher than the 4 speed auto
if the web site is correct - but this doesn't seem right so I'm
wondering if they made a typo). However, not knowing the 1st gear
ratios I don't know if the overall ratio is less or more for the 4
cylinder. I'm guessing it is a fair bit lower given the relatively
minor performance difference from the 50% more torque in the V-6. I
suspect that much of that torque advantage is lost in the gearing.


Matt